[6/1/11 Ed Note: Kloppenburg was my guest today on my KPFK/Pacifica radio show here in Los Angeles. It was her first interview since conceding yesterday. The audio archive is now here. - BF]

Citing a "cascade of irregularities," thousands of tabulation errors discovered during the statewide "recount," and tens of thousands of ballots found to be unverifiable or otherwise having been in violation of the secure chain of custody, Wisconsin's independent Asst. AG JoAnne Kloppenburg conceded the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election for a 10-year term on the bench to Republican incumbent Justice David Prosser this afternoon at a press conference held in Madison.

"Votes were found to be miscounted in every county in the State," Kloppenburg said in her prepared remarks. [Her complete remarks are posted at the end of this article.].

"Over 150 ballot bags containing tens of thousands of votes were found open, unsealed or torn. Waukesha County had twice as many torn, open or unsealed bags as every other county in the state combined. In many cases, municipal clerks in Waukesha testified the bags weren’t torn when they left cities, towns and villages so the security breaches occurred sometime when the bags were in Waukesha County’s custody."

She continued: "Most every county and most every reporting unit statewide had discrepancies in reconciling poll books in which the number of voters and the number of absentee voters is recorded. In several counties, including Dane, Milwaukee, Marquette and Jackson, missing or uncounted ballots were found in unexpected places during the recount, such as a clerk’s office or left in machines."

Despite the widespread irregularities --- and despite the fact that state officials at the Government Accountability (G.A.B.), the state's top election authority, failed to review thousands of pages of minutes, including hundreds of exhibits recorded during the "recount" documenting the irregularities, as The BRAD BLOG reported exclusively last night --- Kloppenburg announced she would not file for a judicial review of the certified results.

"This recount should serve as a wake-up call to improve Wisconsin’s election processes," the Asst. AG explained to the gathered media...

She said there was "ample evidence that the election processes by which ballots are supposed to handled, recorded, secured and counted are not followed," and that "thousands of votes were not counted, were counted incorrectly, or have been called into question."

"There are unacceptable gaps in ballot security which, if allowed to continue, threaten the integrity of Wisconsin elections and undermine the confidence Wisconsin residents deserve to have in the results of those elections."

She went on to describe "numerous glaring anomalies in Waukesha," which, she said "certainly warrant further, independent investigation."

Nonetheless, she said, describing the bar required by the court for overturning an election, "Wisconsin law makes it clear that even on such a record as has been developed by this recount, the threshold for a Court to overturn an election on appeal is, appropriately, very high. David Prosser has won this election, and I congratulate him.I will not be requesting judicial review of the results."

Kloppenburg also announced that her campaign would be submitting a letter to the G.A.B. which "summarizes the anomalies, irregularities and in some cases the unexplained mysteries uncovered in this recount" in hopes that they might help to "improve the security, accountability and transparency of the election process in Wisconsin, and to ensure that every vote counts and is counted accurately."

"The G.A.B. must improve compliance with basic election procedures," she understated.

Kloppenburg's complete prepared statement today, as well as her letter to G.A.B. Executive Director and General Counsel Kevin Kennedy, summarizing hundreds of "compromised bags" of ballots with "large holes, tears, slits, openings...improperly sealed" and those with "seal and inspector number errors" including "unmatched or missing seal numbers or signatures," are both posted in full below...

* * *

The BRAD BLOG's most recent detailed coverage of the WI Supreme Court election "recount", highlighting a great number of the "cascade of irregularities" referenced by Kloppenburg today...

Over the past five weeks, clerks and volunteers in Wisconsin’s 72 counties have worked hard and long on a recount of the vote in the April 5 election.

Over the course of their work, votes were found to be miscounted in every county in the State. Over 150 ballot bags containing tens of thousands of votes were found open, unsealed or torn. Waukesha County had twice as many torn, open or unsealed bags as every other county in the state combined. In many cases, municipal clerks in Waukesha testified the bags weren’t torn when they left cities, towns and villages so the security breaches occurred sometime when the bags were in Waukesha County’s custody. Most every county and most every reporting unit statewide had discrepancies in reconciling poll books in which the number of voters and the number of absentee voters is recorded. In several counties, including Dane, Milwaukee, Marquette and Jackson, missing or uncounted ballots were found in unexpected places during the recount, such as a clerk’s office or left in machines.

This recount should serve as a wake-up call to improve Wisconsin’s election processes.

Wisconsin clerks are hardworking public servants who have a big responsibility for a high-profile and important public function: elections. In the thousands of pages of minutes from this recount – which I and my team have analyzed – there is scant evidence of individuals trying to vote fraudulently. There is however, ample evidence that the election processes by which ballots are supposed to handled, recorded, secured and counted are not followed, because those rules are either misunderstood or ignored. As a result, thousands of votes were not counted, were counted incorrectly, or have been called into question.

Some may argue that the fact that the final vote totals changed by about 300 votes from the initial canvass to the certified recount totals, is evidence that Wisconsin elections processes reach an accurate result and this recount was unnecessary. But in the course of the recount we have seen that election procedures are not always followed or well understood. We discovered that compliance with statutory responsibilities is uneven. There are unacceptable gaps in ballot security which, if allowed to continue, threaten the integrity of Wisconsin elections and undermine the confidence Wisconsin residents deserve to have in the results of those elections.

The recount was always about much more than the small difference in votes between the two candidates. Widespread irregularities, unintentional as they may be, around the state, along with the cascade of irregularities in Waukesha, make it clear that we must do more to ensure the electoral process in Wisconsin is beyond reproach.

However, Wisconsin law makes it clear that even on such a record as has been developed by this recount, the threshold for a Court to overturn an election on appeal is, appropriately, very high.

David Prosser has won this election, and I congratulate him.

I will not be requesting judicial review of the results.

Wis. Stat. §5.01(1) provides that the state election laws “shall be construed so as to give effect to the will of the electors, if that can be ascertained, notwithstanding informality or failure to comply with some of its provisions.” It is questionable whether even the statewide extent of noncompliance uncovered by this recount would cross the bar raised by this statutory language. Moreover, Wisconsin courts have held that absent connivance, fraud or undue influence, substantial compliance with the statutory voting procedures is sufficient.

Which brings me to Waukesha and the question of whether-- or if --- there was manipulation of some ballots, given the fact that so many bags were unsealed to the point of being wide open. Here again, evidence of opportunity to manipulate or alter ballots is not enough. There would have to be compelling proof that the integrity of the ballots has been compromised. The numerous glaring anomalies in Waukesha certainly warrant further, independent investigation. However, the defects or irregularities in the sealing and securing of the ballot bags, as documented in the recount minutes, would not be sufficient to meet the threshold set by law.

As an attorney, as an officer of the court and as someone who understands both the power and the limits of the law, it is my obligation to evaluate and recognize the legal grounds on which I can and cannot act. I have reviewed the record, the evidence and the law. It would serve no purpose to bring a suit with insufficient legal basis. That is not the kind of lawyer I am.

Mark Twain once advised “Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest.”

We did the right thing in asking for a recount in this very, very close election. The recount shed light on significant and widespread issues with elections in Wisconsin. The magnitude of those issues surprised clerks, election volunteers, and observers from both campaigns. The problems and gaps ought to be addressed as quickly as possible. And they ought to be fixed.

That is why my campaign is submitting a letter to the Government Accountability Board which summarizes the anomalies, irregularities and in some cases the unexplained mysteries uncovered in this recount. I call on the GAB to take action, along with local clerks, to improve the security, accountability and transparency of the election process in Wisconsin, and to ensure that every vote counts and is counted accurately. The GAB must improve compliance with basic election procedures.

We are also doing the right thing by declining to pursue legal action. Based on the record established in this recount and based on Wisconsin law, the will of the electors has been determined. It is time to learn from this recount, fix the problems it uncovered and ensure that future elections are different.

The campaign I ran – respectful, honest and fair --- allowed me to share my ideas about what a Supreme Court Justice ought to be: independent and impartial. And the campaign reaffirmed my respect for and love of the law and my conviction that we can – and must – have Courts that embody the best of who we are and which are true to the ideal of equal justice under the law. In the end, I hope my supporters share that perspective: The work of this campaign may be ended, but our commitment to doing our part to make Wisconsin’s future --- and our Courts – stronger and better isn’t done. Together, we have more to do.

I am rending my garments and beating my chest. Flagellating my back. Please send in more suggestions on what I can do to vent my frustration at the ongoing "winning" of fraudulent elections by thieves with the help of capitulating LOSERS who FAIL to hold the results HOSTAGE to accountability.

God help us!

At this rate we will NEVER have an accountable election in this country of FOOLS!!!

Coward. This just proves that there is no elected official that takes this seriously. The fact is this system guarantees outcomes that protect politicians of all stripes and none of them are going to upset the balance. They get the power and money from the system and we get screwed.

'If the law supposes that,' said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, 'the law is a ass…'

Given the unquestioned vulnerability of the e-voting systems to a malicious hack committed by an insider with minimal access, given the massive irregularities, both as documented by The BRAD BLOG and now greatly expanded by Ms. Kloppenburg's formal statement, there is absolutely no logical reason why a nation or a state that purports to be a democracy would legally extend a presumption of correctness that can only be overcome, in Kloppenburg's words, by proof of "connivance, fraud or undue influence."

What may be sufficient for WI courts under that state's laws should be manifestly insufficient in any nation that purports to be a democracy.

Ms. Kloppenburg states:

Wis. Stat. §5.01(1) provides that the state election laws “shall be construed so as to give effect to the will of the electors, if that can be ascertained, notwithstanding informality or failure to comply with some of its provisions.”

Given the near total lack of transparency and massive irregularities, there is no way for Kloppenburg or Prosser, or anyone else for that matter, to know whether the result certified by the GAB reflects the will of the voters.

Finally, while I would have much preferred a legal challenge, I would hope that those who regularly read The BRAD BLOG would express their disagreement with and disappointment in Ms. Kloppenburg's difficult decision in a respectful manner. Throughout this protracted affair she has conducted herself with both integrity and decorum.

I never failed to be astonished at the lack of vision and gumption of people in politics. Time and again the truth is revealed and with it the obvious need for dramatic, probably uncomfortable, action to be taken. But, no thank you. Here's Kloppenburg making a nice little speech about the obvious need to DO something. Unfortunately, there is just nothing further(like make a much bigger fuss and try to draw some much needed attention to all this) SHE can do here.

"Let this be a wake up call...Now if you'll excuse me, I gotta go take a nap."

PATGINSD writes (Comment #3) "At this rate we will NEVER have an accountable election in this country of FOOLS!!!"

Precisely. As long as people are willing to vote in and settle for unverifiable, easily hacked elections where there is no real recourse, there will never be any incentive for the powers that be to allow honest elections.

If you're willing to pay ten dollars for my widget, why would I sell it to you for a dollar?

If you're willing to work without pay, why would anyone pay you?

If you're willing to settle for second best, how can you demand the best?

Until people get angry enough to say, "Enough is enough. If I can't know that my ballot is counted accurately, that the results of the election cannot be overturned by central tabulator "glitches," manipulation of recounts by corrupt elections officials, biased media announcements, a candidate conceding a race they'd actually won because they can't prove they won, courts dismissing cases by giving elections officials the benefit of the doubt, a superdelegate vote overriding the will of the ordinary voters, the Electoral College not following the popular vote, Congress dismissing Federal Elections Contests without bothering to review the evidence, Congress deciding to accept or reject the Electoral votes, the Supreme Court intervening, or in any other way, I will not vote.

But even if I could be certain that all votes would be counted and counted accurately, and that the popular vote would be the final say, I won't vote for candidates I can't hold accountable once they're in office. If I can't hold them accountable, they have no reason to represent me, and corporations will give them every reason not to. Saying that they're only in office for a certain term and then somebody else can be elected, doesn't mollify me. Would you give me your power of attorney for a mere ten minutes if you knew that it would only take me ten minutes to clear out all your accounts and steal all your money?

We need more than honest elections. We need accountability in government because even if we vote for candidates who say that they will do the right thing, they might change their minds under pressure unless we can hold their feet to the fire and force them to do what they said they would do. Would you sign a contract giving me the right to run your business if there was a clause in the contract that said that no matter what I did, even if I ruined your business or gave it away to a competitor, you couldn't fire me for two years?

I know how hard it is to stop voting. We all learned from the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore 2000 that the Constitution doesn't guarantee that our votes must be counted, and that just because somebody wins the popular vote doesn't mean they'll win the election. But it still took me six years to stop voting because I thought that there might be some possible recourse for stolen elections. It took me six years of struggle to realize that there isn't.

My understanding is, Klopperburg might find another avenue to do a further investigation. Yeah, it's frustrating --- but all eyes will be on WI in the upcoming recall elections and hopefully things will go better. There may be a problem because the GAB is asking the legislature for $40k to run those elections --- and the people involved with handing out that money are the ones being recalled!

I helped with the analysis of the counties over the weekend. My favorite comment was from Prosser's lawyer who tried to get a military ballot counted --- despite the fact that it came in 6 days after the election. He insisted it be noted in the minutes, presumably to show that Dems hate the military or something. That ballot had been postmarked March 20 (as I recall) and arrived April 11. Clearly too late to be counted but I wonder how many military ballots don't get back in time and that is also sad.

Brad's done an amazing job of reporting on this, helping to put election fraud onto the national level. I look forward to listening to his show on KPFK tomorrow to hear what he's going to say about it.

Sophia--Agree totally. Why do Democratic candidates always seem to cave in these situations? This appears to be a systematic pattern among the Democratic candidates--it is more than just the decision of individual candidates to concede a race. I believe that the Democrats, too, are complicit in the corrupt electoral system and do not wish to challenge its foundations.

Considering all of the irregularities, I think it is incumbent on Prosser, as a member of the highest court in Wisconsin, to call for another election.

This election was obviously so badly flawed that a noble person would admit that fact, and call for another election to be conducted, with proper procedures followed, to prove the legitimacy of their mandate to serve on the WI Supreme Court. To not do so would cast a pall of suspect legitimacy on their tenure in office.

Man up Prosser. Admit the illegitimacy of this election and stand for a proper one.

I have read all the 16 posted comments and some part of my being agrees with each of them.

For me there is no doubt that this is another election that does not reflect the will of the voters. Something is very wrong if all the found discrepancies and lack of ballot security do not constitute enough to challenge the validity of the election. All over the country, it looks like those that count the vote are testing the system to see how much they can get away with and more and more that is looking like everything.

I really do not know what to do at this point. When there was all the uproar about the Muslim Community Center to be built near ground zero, there was the back-story of how this had mostly been a non-issue except for one woman's constant blogging against it for months. I thought I could learn from that and took to posting election integrity comments at sites. I have noticed some increase in interest about elections but mostly citizens do not know what to do about the problem. It seems like the best I can do is to direct them to sites like BradBlog for more information.

I would like to see the Gold Standard Election Law, written in legislative from, covering everything from hand counted paper ballots to ballot security, election challenges and anything else that needs to be in place to make sure the elections truly reflect the votes of the voters. I would like to see a progressive model of ALEC that had model legislation ready to go for those that care about social, environmental and economic justice. I'd like to know the reason the so called liberal media is so quiet about the election integrity problem.

It SHOULD serve as a wake up call, but it in fact serves as a "go back to sleep" call --- move along, nothing to see here.

If there are SERIOUS irregularities, then the criminal justice system should be engaged. If we do not take the democratic process seriously, then it is OK to "concede" and "move on" and demonstrate that crime pays, and incompetence has no consequence.

i have been chasing how many people voted in the april 5th wisconsin election since about april 8th,i have asked the gab,the individual municipalities,and begged any1 i talked to for help in finding that number(including brad)

last thursday a wisconsin citizen named mary was handed disc that supposedly contained all the info on "how many" peops voted that the gab knew about

i had already read and recorded the votes from the minutes of adams county so it was easy to compare the gabs "record of total voters"(disc info) to the minute info

just in adams county i found 5 differences,three of them huge

the town of easton reported in their minutes 183 total voters but the gab disc reported 462 total voters

the city of adams wards 1-5 reported in their minuetes 431 total voters but the gab disc reported 1076 total voters

the village of friendship was completely ommited from the gab disc

patrick arron frailing personally handed this disc to the wisconsin volenteer named mary

my point is the same people that prepared this disc of obvious bs,prepared the presentation of the election results...but evidently that point is not worth a mention

Discovery In a lawsuit is the place where fraud could have been nailed down. If evidence had been produced or if witnesses came forward because of actual legal consequences without the GABs protection, We might have been able to show the public how fraudulent our elections are. But the lawsuit would be more for getting answers than proving fraud. So her point about being able to prove her case seems odd to me. Instead she calls for an investigation that she must be aware will never happen and even if it did would most likely be a coverup! JK was protecting the system as all our democratic politicians do when it comes to election fraud. And as such is the garden variety politician not the fighter we had hoped for.

Kloppenburg turns out to be just like the rest (SENATOR Al Franken, the exception) who simply are not willing to FIGHT an election to the bitter, final end.

When they come calling for my money, I ask them if they are going to go ALL THE WAY and DEMAND THAT EVERY VOTE BE COUNTED and USE EVERY TOOL AT THEIR DISPOSAL. If they won't commit to that, they don't get a penny from me any more.

Why waste the money to support Kloppenburg's recount, which exposed so very many problems, to then not have those taken up in court where people could be held accountable.

Conceding is simply "keeping your powder dry" for another battle, without understanding that there will be fewer and fewer battles for us to fight as the electoral process is more and more corrupted by known criminals and their ilk.

The G.A.B. showed themselves to be corrupt hacks intent on covering up a criminal election. They made their decision without even looking at the evidence --- if that isn't a kangaroo court, then I don't know the definition.

I am not surprised that Kloppenburg eased off. It's what I suspected would happen though I love to hope.

Man, if there was ever a quixotic quest it's the one election integrity activists are on. Our enemies don't like us. Our friends don't like us. Some of us don't like us. And the overwhelming majority either don't seem to know or care.

Ya gotta love us. This one, as many before, hurts. We keep going anyway. And often with love and good humor. I love us. I give us some kind of courage and persistence award. I'm giving it right here and right now. These are the fights worth fighting.

David did not win the election. The voters lost the election because it was once again stolen.

As long as bullies are not challenged they will continue to force their way upon others.

This is worse than the kid that continues to lose the lunch money to the bully. Kloppenburg chose to run for office and asked the citizens of her state to support her. She established a duty to defend their choice. She raised funds to seek the recount (which I contributed to), and that recount raised more than probable cause for seeking a challenge. The results of the recount were as many of us suspected they would be.
To then concede and not use the information generated by the recount is to betray the voters who supported her. That shows a lack of integrity, and she is not deserving of respect.
Every time this occurs our nation degrades further into a fascist state wrapped in the guise of democracy.
So she expects a Republican controlled legislature, and Republican governor, that both want to retain power, to reform the very system that got them into office. A fools errand.
The citizens of Wisconsin are screwed, and their corporate masters are laughing all the way to the bank. I do not think the Republicans up for a recall election are very worried.

Just hope that all the good people of Wisconsin who demonstrated and went to the effort of collecting signatures for recalls know that their efforts won't mean much with an election process that is fixed.

Any hope of someone suing to stop Prosser from taking office and calling for an investigation? Anyone out there with the clout and the money to do it? Bobby Kennedy? Vincent Bugliosi? Everyone put on their thinking caps!

digesting, and SO grateful for all of the comments here. i have felt so stunned as a resident of waukesha co. for two months - i feel almost inarticulate....but wish to convey my appreciation for brad and his amazing/thorough/accurate and scathing reporting throughout this whole recount. not sure if he knows how alone we would have felt without him. he's one of my newfound heroes. thanks to all who care so deeply about this issue - that alone is another true comfort right now. packing my bags to LEAVE this county....

Very sorry to hear that Kloppenburg is giving up the fight. It must have been a difficult decision, after all of this effort. But in the end, the person who must bear the weight of the consequences must make the decision. The old adage 'walk a mile in another man's shoes' would seem to apply.

I'd also add that while Mark Smith's (#8) reaction is understandable, it is simple logic that not voting is by far the best way to guarantee that your vote won't be counted.

Sadly, Wisconsin’s election laws seem to do a better job of protecting the business interests of voting machine companies than they do of safe-guarding our populace’s right to self-determination. Wisconsin law mandates use of voting machines in all municipalities having populations greater than 7,500. Even when paper ballots and paper tapes exist, canvassers are required to trust the results on voting machines when verifying the initial outcomes reported by polling places. Statutes pertaining to election recounts require that any paper ballots that were initially tallied by optical scan machines must be fed back through machines when verifying vote totals. Paper tape results are only examined to check if the total count of voters recorded by the machine accurately matches the number of registered voters who came to the polling place.

Here’s the crux of the problem: In the event of a recount, current law prohibits recounting by hand the actual number of votes for a given candidate if they were initially entered on a touch screen voting machine or recorded on ballots that have been counted by optiscan ballot readers even when hard copy paper trails exist. Wisconsin’s election law permits a challenger to petition a hand count of ballots, but no language exists in the statutes authorizing a hand count of the actual votes for each candidate whenever machines were initially used to count those votes.

Volumes of documentation exist proving the unreliability of voting machine results due to malfunction, and, in some cases, malfeasance. (See the bradblog.org, blackboxvoting.org or thelandesreport.com) In her 5/31/11 letter to Kevin Kennedy, GAB’s Executive Director and General Counsel, Ms. Kloppenburg reported that touchscreen machines “often malfunctioned” and “machine counts on optical scan machines are often inaccurate” (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8548). She pointed out that “This was revealed particularly in counties where a hand recount was conducted so that the discrepancy between the votes counted by the machine versus the votes counted by a human being was identified.”

Rather than face directly the painful reality that voting machines have been proven to produce misleading results, voters and legislators across our nation continue to rely upon voting-machine-generated tallies when deciding issues of grave importance. How long will “we, the people” continue to prefer the convenience and expediency of machine-counted votes over absolute assurance that our votes are being counted accurately? What more will it take for Wisconsin voters to declare “ENOUGH”?!

Citizens need to demand that Wisconsin’s election laws be modified to require hand-counting votes for each candidate (not just ballots!) without placing an insurmountable burden of proof on the shoulders of the challenger whenever results are close enough to trigger a recount. After all we are simply demanding assurance of an accurate final vote tally. Without that, representative democracy fails to exist.

I have thought long and hard on the vote vs not vote question. I only recently came to thinking maybe not voting was the smart move. I tried running my thinking by some friends just before the Scott Brown election here(in which I ended up voting for Coakley). They treated me with scorn, derision, and ill will. It was most uncomfortable. On the other hand no one responded to any of my reasons and arguments. So here goes.

First of all, for me, as I read and read the assaults on the Constitution by Obama and his administration; as I read and read the betrayals of Obama to every pledge he made as a candidate; it becomes increasingly difficult in good conscience to think of voting for the man again.

I do not support persecution of whistleblowwers--see Jane Mayer's recent New Yorker article.

I do not support immoral and illegal treatment and incarceration of innocent political prisoners.

I do not support letting the Wall Street criminals and the war making criminals break our laws again and again with no consequences.

I do not support letting the criminal poisoning of the gulf by oil companies go unpunished.

I do not support lack of transparency in government and increasing government secrecy.

I do not support continuing to ignore the earth's needs as natural disasters and man made poisons worsen and destroy.

And on and on....

All of these things are happening and in some areas increasing/worsening under the Obama Administration.

Sooooo...my thinking is that only we the people can change our direction. At this point the powers that be are too entrenched. Entrenched in their ways. Entrenched in their denial of cause and effect. Entrenched in their ignorance. Entrenched in their power. It seems most unlikely that change will come from them. That leaves us.

So what will get the citizenry more involved, up off our couches and demanding the changes we, the planet, and our fellow humans are crying for? And in a sooner rather than later time frame because physics and the health of the planet have got us on the clock.

And I think--Maybe NOT voting is the smart move. Maybe NOT supporting Democrats. Weren't more people aware and complaining when Bush was in office? With Obama in office we've got so many people who just seem to stop looking at our myriad problems. Too uncomfortable. Too disturbing. They want, they need to believe that Obama's, SOMEBODY'S, taking care of things. I can understand the impulse. But I don't think it's connected to reality. And we just don't have time to keep fucking around like this.

So I think maybe the practical thing for the planet is for things to get a whole lot worse for the citizenry of the U.S. One thing about the current Republicans--how they're planning on screwing everything up is in plain sight. Even the media, so terribly, willfully negligent in carrying out their duties as watchdogs are hip to the Republican scams. And noisy(at least noisy for them) about all the disastrous Republican plans on the table.

So that's kind of my thinking. The practical thing to give the citizenry, who are our only hope, the necessary goosing to get cracking and all become Egyptians is for the crazies to assume more power and for things to get dramatically worse.

The way we're going, we're fucked. We're on the clock. At this rate by the time(hell, it's probably already too late) we get hip to the jive, we're fucking toast. And we'll either be soggy toast cuz we'll be swept away by floods. Or we'll be dry, dry desert toast cuz there'll be an unforgiving drought. From the planet's and huhmanity's points of view it's way past time we were shaken from our complacency. So let the maelstrom begin. Let the vortex begin. If it happens right now maybe there'll still be time, we'll have a chance of pulling it out, IF EVERYONE GETS MOTIVATED. Maybe we should try that instead of this slow, unobservant slide into oblivion.

I realize this view is problematic in any number of ways, but this post is way long enough already. I will say, though, that this crazy scheme of mine has one huge added benefit. It allows me to act according to my conscience. I'm tired of feeling like a battered housewife in an abusive relationship with no choice but to go along. Fuck 'em, if that's the choice. I don't want to vote for terrorists of ANY stripe.

I've just finished listening to the live interview on KPFK, and I have to say I am very dissatisfied with Kloppenburg's answers. It sounded to me that she was being evasive, relying upon explanations of how things are in Wisconsin rather than answering the questions asked of her. There is plenty of reason to continue with the investigation, and a challenge of the stage-managed "certified" recount numbers is clearly in order. But I suspect that goons friendly to Walker's coup d'etat have "convinced" Kloppenburg that she has better things to be doing than to mess with the Fourth Reich, Wisconsin Chapter.

DES #32, You know I love you. I agree that the decision was certainly difficult for JoAnne Kloppenburg. However, I disagree with your characterization of her as "the person who must bear the weight of the consequences." It is not just she who will bear the weight of the consequences, but the people of Wisconsin who have lost this opportunity to more thoroughly expose corruption in the election system, and who now have to continue to live with the decisions of a Supreme Court likely to rubberstamp the fascist policies of Gov. Walker.

Elections are supposed to belong to the people, and it's not right when there's no workable process for the people to challenge directly the corruption in the system. The way the laws are now written, as far as I know, only the candidates can mount these legal challenges. I think this gives them a high degree of responsibility to do so.

When an attorney, especially one who becomes an assistant attorney general in a state, runs for the highest court in that state, they know well they will be called upon to make very difficult decisions.

The Supreme Court not only applies the current law to a particular case, they establish "precedent", which establishes "case law" for generations in the future.

Her conceding does not just effect her. The citizens of her state, and in an indirect manner, all states will be impacted.
1. Prosser will now continue to sit on the Wisconsin Supreme Court for the next ten years. Not only will he most likely have an impact on the current challenge on the law outlawing public employee collective bargaining, he will be able to make decisions impacting average citizens on multiple issues.
2. Those decisions will be used by lower courts for decades as guidance in their rulings.
3. Since those responsible for this crime against the citizens of Wisconsin were not held accountable, and their crimes rewarded, they will do it again.
4. A legal challenge would have given the citizens of Wisconsin, but also all citizens where these tactics and equipment is used, and opportunity to see how our elections are being stolen.
5. A legal challenge would also have put involved people under oath, and at risk for perjury charges, and/ or other criminal charges under current Wisconsin law. There would have been subpoenas, and multiple other avenues for gathering and preserving the evidence of this criminal conspiracy. Hopefully resulting in criminal charges and convictions.

We have been having "wake-up" calls for over a decade now, in multiple elections. What good does it do to have a 'wake-up" call if those being awakened just turn over and go back to sleep.

Every time a candidate quits in the face of election fraud, those who commit it are strengthened, and they will do it again.

Public policy, laws, and enforcement all reflect who is sworn into office, whether they were actually elected by the majority or not. These decisions are a matter of life and death. I am disgusted by the continual excuse that it is "just politics".

Running campaigns based on lies, dirty -tricks, misrepresentations, vote suppression, and eventually election fraud is not "just politics".

In our country the only peaceful method to make sure we are governed by those representing the majority's interests is through the electoral process. When we lose that, then what?

The consequences of this acquiescence will fall upon many more people than just Kloppenburg.

Em & Jody, I didn't say that no one else but Kloppenburg is affected. I wrote in haste and should have been clear that I was talking about the consequences of mounting a challenge --- she would bear the weight of the consequences of mounting the challenge financially and professionally and personally, amid grinding relentless attacks, along with her family. As I understand it, Prosser had the financial backing of the Republican Party machine, whereas Kloppenburg would have been personally liable for full legal costs.

In a world of intelligent election laws, the decision would not be hers to make, and the financial burden would not fall to her personally.

Candidates are not automatons or machines, they are human beings. Unless one has been a candidate facing a similar situation, one can never truly know what it's like.

***

David, your plan may work, it may not; I don't know. But the simple math is irrefutable: if you don't vote, your vote by definition cannot be counted.

I seldom listen to NPR anymore but was in the car tonight and heard part of the OnPoint with Tom Ashbrook show. I have just listened to part of it again because of something I heard. It is around the 27 - 33 minute point and talks about how hacking into banks and hospitals. It also talks about malware. I wonder how anyone can listen to this show and have any confidence in our elections as long as electronic voting machines are used. I'd like to post something at the show site but am not sure how to word the post. Anyway, I thought some may be interested in this show.

Thanks for the response. Yeah, I don't know if my idea would have a prayer in hell of working in the slightest, and I can't argue with your point about irrefutable math, but I guess I'm framing the problem from a somewhat different angle.

To me it looks like a consciousness problem, an awareness problem, maybe not so much a voting or not problem.

It's lack of awareness/consciousness that drives/supports the denial/ignorance of the importance of the election integrity issues we've been screaming about for a years. It's why we're among the world's most uninformed on crucial matters like the environment and what a society that cares for each other looks like in terms of health care and how they treat their workers.

Can we awaken in time? What would it take? I'm not sure at this point that voting/not voting is gonna cover it.

And I worry that just going along with the present dysfunction by participating in such a corrupt, undemocratic, dysfunctional voting process may be more of an enabling gesture than a proactive one for positive change gesture.

Wasn't there a sign overhanging a freeway once or something?--If voting made a difference, it would be illegal.

Having said all this, I probably will keep voting, but I'm not positive.

I'm working on getting my own voice out there as maybe the best thing I can try to do to help.

Hold it. Now I'm thinking we should investigate HER. It is outrageous and unacceptable that she does not fight this, giving the utterly insane evidence of fraud she uncovered. This will be a wake up call, all right - a wake up call for the Republican in the upcoming recall that they can get away with just about anything.

Am wondering if and when the GAB will be posting the minutes from Waukesha County’s recount? As of today (6/5/11), all counties in Wisconsin EXCEPT Waukesha have both the canvass results and minutes posted. Waukesha County has the canvass results posted but no minutes. I e-mailed the GAB and requested that they post the Waukesha County’s recount minutes as well. Election integrity advocates need well documented information about election failings in order to be able to make a convincing case for stronger election laws. Let’s hope the GAB responds positively and posts the Waukesha County recount minutes soon!

@Dave Lasagna, last November, late for another appointment, I drove all the way across San Francisco, at rush hour, to get to my old voting location. Three blocks from there, I checked in with my heart, and I just COULDN'T go through with it.

I also hadn't re-registered in my new location, where I'd been living for over a year. I just didn't mail the information in.

I am leaving the country as soon as the paperwork gets done, to Canada, where they are certainly having their problems. But there's a bright spot-just read that Vancouver BC powers-that-be have declined to institute online voting. Maybe THEY realize the dire nature of the voting debacles we are facing. I can only hope.

On October 6th, a Thursday, the Afghanistan War will complete its first decade as the United States goes into its 2012 austerity budget.

Tahrir Square in Cairo Egypt translates as Liberation Square. We have in Washington, D.C., a square with the similar name: Freedom Plaza.

This square is located between the Capitol and the White House along Pennsylvania Avenue, and built into its surface is a map of downtown Washington on which nonviolent resistance actions can be conveniently planned.

Today a coalition of organizations and prominent individuals is announcing at http://october2011.org a plan to begin a people's occupation of Washington, D.C., on October 6th, to build it into something larger on the 7th, 8th, and 9th, and to not leave until we are satisfied.

There is absolutely no reason that our government must be permitted to continue functioning on behalf of Wall Street and a war machine.

In Afghanistan, the people protest our bombing of their homes. We sit inside our own homes complaining about our economy, our banks, our schools.

Instead, we now have a chance to have a say, in solidarity with others around the world, with success just as likely --- if just as shocking to those in power --- as with past U.S. people's movements and the recent advances in Tunisia and Egypt.

This will not be another rally and march on a Saturday, make home movies, pat ourselves on the back, and go home. We are coming to Washington to stay.

~~~~~~~

There's LOTS more in the email, but that'll give you a taste. SWEET!

Well, I PERSONALLY think it's time to join with these other brave souls across the country. Give yourself a WEEK or a MONTH or a YEAR to finally stnd up & be counted. Freedom is worth standing for, it's worth dying for. Those folks in Libya & Egypt & Yemen are literally being shot at, gassed, detained, raped, and murdered, and they are NOT STOPPING.

What has this country come to? What has this country DONE?? It IS time to put an end to the Oligarchs.

If not now, when? When the last bit of ocean, land and air are so irradiated & polluted that nothing can live??

If not us, who? It sure ain't gonna be the Banksters & the Wall Street homicidal maniacs.

Ok. Enough. Take heart. Have hope. DO something!

I will too! I swear, on the life of my nephew, that I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees...